The Flat Earth P2

Recently I posted an excerpt from a conversation on Big Footy about so-called Flat Earth Theory. Up next is the continuation of that discussion, and my take on the wider implications that it represents.

Following on from the original post, which I then shared on Big Footy, I became embroiled in debate with two of the theory’s biggest supporters in the thread, Cannot and Darthbards. Let’s take a look at what they said – for reference, posts by myself are in blue, posts by Cannot are in green, and posts from Darthbards are in pink.

After I shared my article with the board, I received the following reply from Darthbards:

Looks to me like it’s the same people who troll and bash religious people over here to me. If people want to believe a different theory to you,just let them.

And how does any alternate theory effect science. People can study more than one theory at a time until we actually find the one that’s correct.

It looks to me that some are just over sensitive to their theories being questioned while thinking it’s perfectly fine to bash others before they can supply their own facts. Shouldn’t you be busy putting together the pieces to the Big Bang theories. Sounds like your the one being destructive to science wasting your time commenting on things you dont have any interest in.

And your why is the reason being being hidden question has been answered. The answer was no idea. If you don’t like that answer,to bad. Your theories have plenty of unanswered questions also.

Go start a big ball thread if you love it so much. The PE people have answered all the questions asked to the best of their ability. If you choose to not believe,good for you,and I support that. We’re all free to make our own choices in what to believe and what not to.

So what are you trying to do now? Gather up an internet gang to come over here and try and force people to believe what you think everyone should believe? Yep that should work lol. Or is your little gang hidden behind their little computer screens just going to offer that fearful retort of abuse. You think the FE people havnt heard that before.

If your so confident with your big ball what would you care what someone else thinks?

The chief problem with Darthbards and his arguments will become clear as this post wears on. It can be summed up as automatically assuming a theory to be false if it is not 100% perfect. He will go on to criticise the Big Bang Theory, will make remarks about us only being aware of 4% of the particles that make up the universe (both Red Herring arguments as well), and will also put together a number of Strawman fallacies.

There’s more to this than ‘believing another theory’. This is about undermining scientific endeavour with vague pseudo-science like FE theory. It is a dead-end of a theory, rooted in religious beliefs rather than science, yet it is being insidiously injected as a scientific idea (much like creationism). It’s then presented as an alternative to conventional science, attacking existing theories on the basis that theory A can’t explain everything. Of course, FE explains far less, but that gets overlooked.

Your string of subtle Ad Hominens not withstanding, I invite you to address the actual content of what I wrote, instead of trying to evade it.

Well don’t bother yourself with it then, and pull your finger out and find this dark matter and big bang and leave others to believe whatever the heck they want to.

And where’s this big gang your posting to,I want to tell those bozos to get their noses out of other people’s business and journeys through life as well.

Emphasis mine. Bards got hung up on the idea that I had somehow issued a call to arms – check out my original post and see for yourself if this is remotely true.

You missed the part where I mentioned that pseudo-scientific nonsense like FE is harmful to genuine science. Perhaps you should heed your own advice and not refer to the scientific method as ‘religious’.

And you obviously missed the part I said it doesn’t effect scientific studies in other areas whatsoever. Your just wasting your time sticking your nose in other people’s business.

And so what I think science is a religion,I never said I don’t like religions. Having beliefs and faith in things is great. Don’t tell me your getting your knickers in a knot over a simple word? The more I see and hear science getting all antsy with the church and bible the more I just think it’s an alternate religion,a different type of religion. It’s just a word,meaning faith, belief,pursuit followed with great devotion. Sounds like a nice word to me.

And this big gang you showed us the post you were sending to, sure are taking their time.

And this vague allusion thing you’ve said in the next post,if you want to think that,good for you. No skin of my nose. Like I said,I think the chances the earth is round is 30%. My ego couldn’t care less if I’m 70% out. In fact I’d be happy if I am and we finally get some understanding of what’s going on. 4% knowledge of the particles in our universe,I’m not making any wild predictions based on that or this Swiss cheese big bang theory.

The ongoing issue here is Bards’ use of the Alternative Syllogism fallacy (not to mention Red Herrings). The Alternative Syllogism fallacy is where two ideas – A and B – are presented, and if A is not perfect, B wins. It doesn’t matter if theory B is not perfect, in the mind of the person presenting the argument, any blip, error or lack of data on the part of theory A means it gets thrown out in favour of B.

At this point, I replied to each paragraph, I won’t list the argument like that here, as it would mean a lot of repetition.

You completely failed to understand the point. Pseudo-science, of any nature, is harmful to science regardless of the field of study. It encourages a line of reasoning (or anti-reasoning) that if left unchecked, will lead to other pseudo-scientific rubbish getting into the system. This has widespread ramifications for us all, which makes it my business, so I will stick my nose in and if you don’t like it? It’s no skin off my back.

It matters because conflating faith-driven ideas with scientific study is misleading. It’s how the religious right gets ideas like creationism into school science books, despite it having no business being there.

What are you on about? I posted on my site yes – never said anything about anyone else getting involved. If people want to respond to it, they can, if they don’t, so be it.

Yet you can’t present any reasonable alternative ideas that aren’t couched in unscientific notions. You can’t even present a reason for a vast global conspiracy to hide FE from us. It’s therefore a vague allusion. You might have more credibility if you admitted that.

Your totally missing the point,there’s a science board here,go there or stick to your blog. I don’t see how this theory effects science at all. People choose science,people choose this theory. People are free to choose whatever they wish,what business of yours is it. If you think science is so under threat,strive harder and stop calling other people’s interests ‘rubbish’. Or enter parliament and try and have some law passed so your theories are all we must obey.

And I see you took a pot shot at the other religions as soon as you got the chance. Again,prove God doesn’t exist. Not religious personally,probably 50/50,higher than round ball theory though. Who are you to tell other parents what they would like their children to believe or learn in school.Seems like there’s plenty of religious people out there,so why not teach it. At my kids school it’s actually optional so stop complaining about it. If you don’t want your children believing in God, just tell them that. Our children will progress in their journey through life and then make their own call.

How about you worry about yourself,your blog,and stop preaching to me. I’m only explaining FE theory,couldn’t give two hoots whether someone believes or not,why would I,it’s their choice.

And next time you want to stick something I say on your little blog,how about you have the common courtesy of seeking my permission. I would have said yes anyway most likely.

You’ve made your point here,you don’t like FE theory. I’ve already said your within your rights, so why do you keep commenting about some make believe danger like our flat universe is going to end?

You should go get some Kinesiology or something and relax a bit.

At this point, I was also having a conversation with Cannot. This is a reply of mine to him when I pressed him to explain why a conspiracy would exist to hide the true nature of the earth from everyone.

You have completely failed to answer the important part of the question. In fact, you have evaded it.

To maintain a global conspiracy involving several space agencies, hundreds of airline companies, communications companies, shipping firms and multiple governments for several years without anyone noticing ‘the truth’ would be an enormously expensive and time-consuming exercise. I have yet to see one satisfactorily explanation for why it would be necessary to conceal a flat earth from the public, especially through such elaborate means. I may not be able to work out why such a conspiracy would exist, but from your non-answer to my comment, it’s clear you cannot do so either.

what a load of pig whallop – i have not evaded the question what so ever, i have made it clear to you

just cause you dont know why TPTB would lie to you on a issue, doesnt mean that there is no lie; it merely means you dont know cause you are probable a pleb. any other conclusions you are worth not much

the Manhattan project along with numerous other historical events prove secrets can be keep relatively easily. you merely departmentalize the information and keep the bigger secrets to the top – the nature of ‘secret soceities’ and various elites groupins that have held power over humanity is to keep the top information in the top ranks as opposed to mouthing off to every rank and file member. this is why i laugh when you run on the mill freemasons just say we play poker and do some charity work

its quite funny you are saying said elite powers would have money problems trying to have such a scheme going. these folks wouldnt be concerned with dollars and cents too much. Almost as funny as saying it would be too… “time consuming”. i dun think there is a rush

to summarize what you consider a “satisfactorily explanation” is laughable and doesnt carry much. ive offered my own version earlier in the discussion but it has some religious overtones and the uber atheists might start crying, again

no doubt if you look into FE theory there will be some explanations

You missed the part where I mentioned that pseudo-scientific nonsense like FE is harmful to genuine science. Perhaps you should heed your own advice and not refer to the scientific method as ‘religious’.

how , is it ‘harmful’ to ‘real’ science?

you’d think in ’17 there would be suffice proof of the super fast, multi direction moving globe earth that FE could be easily debunked and yet nope, the fe is apparently one of the fastest growing movements

I don’t even know what the point was that picture, but Cannot (who has since been suspended from Big Footy for rule violations) did not appear to be interested in fact-driven discussion.

This is where things get a bit complicated, and for the sake of expediency, I would recommend viewing the thread directly. Darthbards and Cannot began chatting, and their chat included repeating Ad Hominen and Strawman arguments:

Careful now,he’s sent a call out to his computer army,linking this very sight and naming those he wants placed under attack for daring to think differently from himself. Rambling on about throwing balls in the air to prove Gravity while dismissing the experiments already carried out with zero understanding of Universal Acceleration or the possibility of a repulsion force from nearby parallel universe. Shows how much of the thread he’s actually read before declaring war and attempting to send the fear of God into his blogites by suggesting they are now in the gravest of danger because people are daring to think differently to them.

Well darth_timon has adopted those policies that he has more right to tell a persons child what they should believe,ahead of the very parents who gave birth to,and raising those children. Funny thing is,I missed the part where they proved God doesn’t exist before their attacks on this bloke,and their ruling that all must cease their own individual journeys through life. I also never remember religion being mentioned in this thread until the anti brigade recently decided to branch out in telling us what we can or can’t do and believe.

And this computer army from the land of blog sure are taking their time on arriving to where they have been linked to.

Of course, if you are reading this or following the thread on Big Footy, you’ll see that Bards is raising arguments against points I didn’t raise, which is the perfect representation of a Strawman.

With the next post of mine, it is once again a reply broken up into chunks, so apologies if it is hard to follow.

When stuff like flat earth theory is paraded around as a valid alternative to something that is based on literally hundreds of years of study, it serves to undermine genuine attempts to understand the world around us. Resources that are better used elsewhere are being wasted on dealing with this sort of insidious idea, that would fill minds with pseudo-scientific rubbish if left unchecked. Your angry rhetoric notwithstanding, I have every right to discuss this here, in this thread, and I have every right to call flat earth theory rubbish. It’s not an ‘interest’ – it’s a symptom of a dumbing down of society. It’s no different to creationism – it’s faux science, that is trying to masquerade as the real thing, why should that be allowed into science lessons?

Strawman fallacy (you’re attacking an argument I didn’t make). I didn’t attack religion – I criticised the injection of religious ideas into science lessons. If you have faith in God, more power to you – if you don’t, again, more power to you – but you’re using a religious mentality and trying to pass it off as science, which is blatantly wrong, and then saying I’m attacking religion? That’s just dishonest of you.

I can say whatever I want in this thread. The discussion is about FE theory, which is what I am discussing. It clearly matters enough for you to keep defending it.

You base this 30% chance on what? A rejection of hundreds of years of observation in favour of…. ?

Here’s the thing. I don’t require your permission. You made public posts on a public forum. I can repost this entire conversation on my site, on other forums, on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter – anywhere I want. Given that you have failed to extend much courtesy to me (by creating strawmen distortions of my position, an act of clear dishonesty), what makes you feel I should extend any to you?

I find it amusing that you feel the need to refer to posting about this on my site as a rallying cry. I don’t recall issuing a call to arms in my post, but I am interested in preserving these discussions for posterity. I have to wonder – why are you so threatened by this that you have to imply a meaning that isn’t there, then attack that? You are far too fond of Strawmen.

Another Strawman. You grossly exaggerate and distort my position. Fe theory relies on non-scientific means, yet its supporters also try to pass it off as a scientific theory. It’s clearly not a scientific theory, so attempts to inject it into the science curriculum are symptomatic of a growing anti-science mindset. Quite how this will affect our progress and our understanding of the universe we don’t yet know.

At this point, I’m going to fast-forward to the challenge I issued to Darthbards.

Darth Timon vs Darth Bards Round 1

Ok Bards, since you are seemingly avoiding my posts (or some of them anyway), I’ve decided to throw the first punch anyway. A series of challenges for you to answer about FE theory.

1. What Replaces Gravity?

Assuming you are not trolling (which is a distinct possibility given your posts, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt), what is the force that keeps us grounded to the earth’s surface, if we go with your idea that gravity isn’t real? Related to this, what powers the sun if there is in fact no gravity crushing the mass and generating nuclear forces in the core?

2. Mechanisms

What is the underlying mechanism behind the force that keeps us grounded?

What is the mechanism behind the tides?

3. Lack of Evidence

How is it possible that a giant ice wall has never been reported by any one of the millions of people who would be required to be ‘in’ on this conspiracy? How is it that there has never been a single photograph of this?

So there you have it. If this becomes a proper debate, I’ll post it here.